• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Makes New Budget Sales Pitch; GOP Strikes Back

Rhapsody1447 said:
Why dont do you actually read the chart? It's percentage of our spending NOT our GDP. When looking at the size of our budget percentage of Total Outlays is VERY relevant, and you can see defense as a total percentage of the budget is at all time lows. What's your obsession with what other countries are spending? We should make our fiscal and defense decision based on what other countries are doing? No, why don't we look at the budget as it stands and realize we can cut defense all we want and it still won't make a lick of difference.
Click to expand...

Threats are not proportional to our spending either. It is silly to talk of debt reduction as long was we continue with our most wasteful spending.
 
iliveonramen said:
Why do you think no Conservative President has ever cut the budget? Why do they always pass tax cuts and never touch the underlying spending? Because it's not that simple. Because they know that cutting government spending is generally contractive economic policy and causing a recession as President is the sure fire way to get voted out.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with that. They dont cut spending because they dont want to take the political heat that taking handouts out of the hands of the eternally needy would bring.
 
Fletch said:
It has nothing to do with that. They dont cut spending because they dont want to take the political heat that taking handouts out of the hands of the eternally needy would bring.
Click to expand...

If that were the case, then conservatives would support a living wage and UHC to reduce the welfare roles.
 
Catawba said:
Bitching about the debt, without addressing the true cause = Emotional ploy.
Click to expand...

The true cause according to you is simply Republican policy. So there is no arguing with you, because if we don't go along with your partisan fairytale, our argument is automatically reduced to an emotional ploy, or so goes your fairytale.


Romney only offers increased spending and more tax cuts for the rich = more debt!
Click to expand...

So he's very similar to Obama then?
 
Catawba said:
If that were the case, then conservatives would support a living wage and UHC to reduce the welfare roles.
Click to expand...

That would just be trading one welfare scheme for another.
 
Neomalthusian said:
That would just be trading one welfare scheme for another.
Click to expand...

Since when did working for a living become a welfare scheme?

People have only 3 choices for survival:

*Working for a living

*Taxpayer supported Welfare assistance

*Crime


Which do you prefer?
 
AdamT said:
So ... you seem to be arguing against defense cuts, and yet you support Ron Paul who would absolutely decimate defense spending -- to a degree far in excess of anything Obama has proposed. What's up with that?
Click to expand...

Who said I supported Ron Paul? I didn't
 
iliveonramen said:
Why do you think no Conservative President has ever cut the budget? Why do they always pass tax cuts and never touch the underlying spending? Because it's not that simple. Because they know that cutting government spending is generally contractive economic policy and causing a recession as President is the sure fire way to get voted out.
Click to expand...
The fact of the matter is this. The gov't is way too involved in the economy anyway. Whether it be playing favorites by penalizing companies that go overseas, floundering on the Keystone Pipeline, or attempting to get the middle class hooked on handouts by giving them mortgage relief and student loan bailouts. To wean off the gov't is going to hurt, no doubt about it. As it should. Its our fault we're in the position to begin with. We kept re-electing these big government idiots. There's no one to point the finger at but ourselves, our parents, and our grandparents.
 
MarineTpartier said:
Dude, I am so sick of hearing you complain about military costs. The DOD is THE ONLY department of the friggin gov't that has actually cut its costs and presented a plan to be fiscally responsible. Whats your excuse for the FACT that the DOD has just proposed ANOTHER budget that cuts more spending while your POTUS wants to spend 1.3 Trillion dollars on the hope (he loves that word) that it will come back due to some huge economic turn around that he thinks is going to happen? Or, like I posted earlier, at least he put something on the table! Your Dem controlled Senate can't even tell us what they're spending! They have proposed no budget since 2009. We don't even know what our gov't is doing right now. Great transparency there. Not to mention that its criminal. But of course, you and people like you would say it was political posturing if the House brought charges against Harry Reid and the Senate for breaking the law. Its time for you and libs like you to pull your head out of your butt and recongnize the fact that Obama is trying to get re-elected and he doesn't care what it will cost to get him there.
Click to expand...

So, nothing for that Catawba? Just gonna act like I didn't say it because you have nothing to say back huh?
 
MarineTpartier said:
So, nothing for that Catawba? Just gonna act like I didn't say it because you have nothing to say back huh?
Click to expand...

You are entitled to your opinion. I'm more interested in facts, sorry!
 
Catawba said:
You are entitled to your opinion. I'm more interested in facts, sorry!
Click to expand...

Oh, you mean like the military has cut its budget more that any other gov't agency. Check
Obama wants to add 1.3 trillion to the deficit Check
The Dem controlled Senate hasn't published a budget since 2009. Check
Yep, all facts. So, again, whatta ya got?
 
Catawba said:
Since when did working for a living become a welfare scheme?
Click to expand...

It isn't. Guaranteeing a "living wage" (whatever that means) for work that isn't worth a living wage is a welfare scheme. The money to artificially boost wages for low-value work has to come from somewhere. If a person whose labor is worth $8/hr is getting paid $20 because of some government program, that's essentially a welfare scheme. A government intrusion into the marketplace for the purposes of raising everyone's welfare. Sounds great, as long as you ignore the cost.

People have only 3 choices for survival:

*Working for a living

*Taxpayer supported Welfare assistance

*Crime

Which do you prefer?
Click to expand...

I personally prefer working for a living, but that doesn't mean any work that anyone does is necessarily worth some minimum wage that you have in your mind.
 
AdamT said:
So now the offer that he made during the debt ceiling debacle is in writing. One less excuse for the Republicans.
Click to expand...

So when is Harry Reid going to bring that budget up for a vote?
 
MarineTpartier said:
Oh, you mean like the military has cut its budget more that any other gov't agency. Check
Obama wants to add 1.3 trillion to the deficit Check
The Dem controlled Senate hasn't published a budget since 2009. Check
Yep, all facts. So, again, whatta ya got?
Click to expand...

We spend more on the military than at any time in our past, almost as much of the rest of the world combined, and have been doing so for the last decade.
Romney has stated he wants to spend more than Obama on the military.
Obama just published a budget and it was presented to the Senate Finance Committee yesterday.

So much for your "facts", and your "alternative" to Obama.
 
Catawba said:
We spend more on the military than at any time in our past, almost as much of the rest of the world combined, and have been doing so for the last decade.
Romney has stated he wants to spend more than Obama on the military.
Obama just published a budget and it was presented to the Senate Finance Committee yesterday.

So much for your "facts", and your "alternative" to Obama.
Click to expand...

You really believe the obama rhetoric don't you? Now are you going to demand that Harry Reid bring the budget up for a vote?
 
Neomalthusian said:
It isn't. Guaranteeing a "living wage" (whatever that means) for work that isn't worth a living wage is a welfare scheme. The money to artificially boost wages for low-value work has to come from somewhere. If a person whose labor is worth $8/hr is getting paid $20 because of some government program, that's essentially a welfare scheme. A government intrusion into the marketplace for the purposes of raising everyone's welfare. Sounds great, as long as you ignore the cost.



I personally prefer working for a living, but that doesn't mean any work that anyone does is necessarily worth some minimum wage that you have in your mind.
Click to expand...

NO ONE IS SUGGESTING $20 AN HOUR.

We are talking about a a couple more bucks an hour for the full time manual labor jobs that exist so that a person can have subsistence to survive without taxpayer assistance.

The only other options are welfare or crime. I prefer someone working for a living, but that's just me........................
 
Conservative said:
You really believe the obama rhetoric don't you? Now are you going to demand that Harry Reid bring the budget up for a vote?
Click to expand...

It was presented to the Senate Finance Committee yesterday.
 
Catawba said:
We spend more on the military than at any time in our past, almost as much of the rest of the world combined, and have been doing so for the last decade.
Romney has stated he wants to spend more than Obama on the military.
Obama just published a budget and it was presented to the Senate Finance Committee yesterday.

So much for your "facts", and your "alternative" to Obama.
Click to expand...
Again you avoid the facts I stated, and, you assume I would vote for Romney.
 
Catawba said:
It was presented to the Senate Finance Committee yesterday.
Click to expand...

LOL,, ok, let me know when it is introduced to the Senate. What is going to happen when it is proven that all in that budget does nothing but increase the debt more and does nothing to reign in the deficit?
 
MarineTpartier said:
Again you avoid the facts I stated, and, you assume I would vote for Romney.
Click to expand...


You haven't proven any facts yet, but congratulations on your wise choice in not voting for Romney!
 
Conservative said:
LOL,, ok, let me know when it is introduced to the Senate. What is going to happen when it is proven that all in that budget does nothing but increase the debt more and does nothing to reign in the deficit?
Click to expand...

You don't know much about the budget process do you?

OK, here is a primer for you:

"Prior to 1974, Congress had no formal process for establishing a coherent budget. When newly-elected President Richard Nixon began to refuse to spend funds that the Congress had allocated, Congress needed a more formal means by which to challenge him. The Congressional Budget Act created the Congressional Budget Office and directed more control of the budget to CBO and away from the President's Office of Management and the Budget. The Act passed easily as the administration was embroiled in the Watergate scandal and unwilling to provoke Congress."

"The President, according to the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, must submit a budget to Congress each year. In its current form, federal budget legislation law (31 U.S.C. 1105(a)) specifies that the President submit a budget between the first Monday in January and the first Monday in February. In recent times, the President's budget submission, entitled Budget of the U.S. Government, has been issued in the first week of February."

"The House and Senate Budget Committees begin consideration of the President's budget proposals in February and March. Other committees with budgetary responsibilities submit requests and estimates to the Budget committees during this time. The Budget committees each submit a budget resolution by April 1. The House and Senate each consider those budget resolutions and are expected to pass them, possibly with amendments, by April 15. Budget resolutions specify funding levels for appropriations committees and subcommittees.

Appropriations committees, starting with allocations in the budget resolution, put together appropriations bills, which may be considered in the House after May 15. Once appropriations committees pass their bills, they are considered by the House and Senate. A conference committee is typically required to resolve differences between House and Senate bills. Once a conference bill has passed both chambers of Congress, it is sent to the President, who may sign the bill or veto. If he signs, the bill becomes law. Otherwise, Congress must pass another bill to avoid a shutdown of at least part of the federal government.

In recent years, Congress has not passed all of the appropriations bills before the start of the fiscal year. Congress has then enacted continuing resolutions, that provide for the temporary funding of government operations."

United States budget process - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Catawba said:
You don't know much about the budget process do you?

OK, here is a primer for you:

"Prior to 1974, Congress had no formal process for establishing a coherent budget. When newly-elected President Richard Nixon began to refuse to spend funds that the Congress had allocated, Congress needed a more formal means by which to challenge him. The Congressional Budget Act created the Congressional Budget Office and directed more control of the budget to CBO and away from the President's Office of Management and the Budget. The Act passed easily as the administration was embroiled in the Watergate scandal and unwilling to provoke Congress."

"The President, according to the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, must submit a budget to Congress each year. In its current form, federal budget legislation law (31 U.S.C. 1105(a)) specifies that the President submit a budget between the first Monday in January and the first Monday in February. In recent times, the President's budget submission, entitled Budget of the U.S. Government, has been issued in the first week of February."

"The House and Senate Budget Committees begin consideration of the President's budget proposals in February and March. Other committees with budgetary responsibilities submit requests and estimates to the Budget committees during this time. The Budget committees each submit a budget resolution by April 1. The House and Senate each consider those budget resolutions and are expected to pass them, possibly with amendments, by April 15. Budget resolutions specify funding levels for appropriations committees and subcommittees.

Appropriations committees, starting with allocations in the budget resolution, put together appropriations bills, which may be considered in the House after May 15. Once appropriations committees pass their bills, they are considered by the House and Senate. A conference committee is typically required to resolve differences between House and Senate bills. Once a conference bill has passed both chambers of Congress, it is sent to the President, who may sign the bill or veto. If he signs, the bill becomes law. Otherwise, Congress must pass another bill to avoid a shutdown of at least part of the federal government.

In recent years, Congress has not passed all of the appropriations bills before the start of the fiscal year. Congress has then enacted continuing resolutions, that provide for the temporary funding of government operations."

United States budget process - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

You don't get it, the 2012 obama budget was rejected by the Senate 97-0 and that is after no budget was passed in 2010-2011-2012 and 2013 won't be any different. Funding will be done by continuing resolutions and the 2013 Obama budget will not even get a vote or if it does it will be another 97-0 vote. 23 Democrat Senators are up for re-election in November and not one of them is going to put their name behind a vote for this budget. This is a campaign document that does nothing but promote class warfare and some just aren't smart enough to see the lies in it. Why don't you think a little, how many people make up that top 2% and how much revenue is going to come from that top 2%. I cannot believe how brainwashed you are.
 
Catawba said:
I can't believe you still don't know how the budget process works!
Click to expand...

I can believe that is your answer which is non responsive to the post. The budget process led to no signed budget for the past 3 years and apparently you have no problem with that. You also have no problem touting the lies of the Obama budget that doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of passing but instead is a campaign doctrine that appeals to the nanny state vote like you appear to be
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom